Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Japan HDTV

Last response: in Home Theatre
Share
Anonymous
November 29, 2004 10:41:43 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

With only 12 million homes capable of HDTV so far, 28 million by end of
2005, Japan has sold 1.6 million digital TV sets in their first year of
broadcasting with multicasting and cell phone reception both coming next
year.

http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/newse/20041129wo62.htm

Bob Miller

More about : japan hdtv

Anonymous
November 29, 2004 10:41:44 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller wrote:
> With only 12 million homes capable of HDTV so far, 28 million by end of
> 2005, Japan has sold 1.6 million digital TV sets in their first year of
> broadcasting with multicasting and cell phone reception both coming next
> year.
>
> http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/newse/20041129wo62.htm
>

Once again, bob posts a source that refutes his claim:

"About 1.6 million television sets and tuners that are compatible with
digital technology have been shipped out".

Which, as we all know, includes units shipped to stores and reviewers.
It says nothing about the number that consumers have purchased. In
addition, the number of US homes that are "capable of HDTV so far"
(which in the above context means could receive an HD signal if they
possessed the appropriate equipment) is close to 10 times that of Japan.

It also says that:

"Although prices of digital TV sets have fallen, even 22-inch sets still
cost more than 200,000 yen. Lowering prices is the key to increasing the
number of households capable of receiving digital TV broadcasting".

That's about $2000 for a 22 inch set. That's quite a lot more expensive
than in the US. I would guess those prices have to drop substantially
before the Japanese consumer really gets on the HD bandwagon.

Elsewhere it says:

"This autumn, NHK Educational channel introduced its multiple
programming function, through which viewers can watch two or three
programs simultaneously on a single channel, although the picture
quality will be the same as that of the analog format".

Why only two or three subchannels? Is the datacasting they are doing
really consuming that much bandwidth? That sounds like a losing
proposition for a commercial station.

Matthew
Anonymous
November 29, 2004 10:41:44 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004, Bob Miller wrote:
>> "This autumn, NHK Educational channel
> Commercial stations in the US and Japan only produced one program per
> physical channel for the last 50 years. How does doing "only two or three
> subchannels" or three to four times what they did analog become a losing
> proposition? Sounds like a way to print money with OTA broadcasting to me.

NHK is not a commercial station. NHK is supported by mandatory fees on TV
set owners in Japan, like the way BBC is supported in Britain.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Related resources
November 29, 2004 10:41:44 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<XXKqd.3419$u81.2446@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> With only 12 million homes capable of HDTV so far, 28 million by end of
> 2005, Japan has sold 1.6 million digital TV sets in their first year of
> broadcasting with multicasting and cell phone reception both coming next
> year.
>
> http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/newse/20041129wo62.htm
>
> Bob Miller

How can anybody have such an overpowering desire to keep a stink stirred up?



Keith
Anonymous
November 29, 2004 10:41:44 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<XXKqd.3419$u81.2446@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> With only 12 million homes capable of HDTV so far, 28 million by end of
> 2005, Japan has sold 1.6 million digital TV sets in their first year of
> broadcasting with multicasting and cell phone reception both coming next
> year.
>
> http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/newse/20041129wo62.htm
>
> Bob Miller

What's the point of this post? Given your history of post, I'll take
this as another "look how far behind the USA is" post. If you look at
Japan (behind this specific technology) you'll find they are country
that loves to embrace technology. We're talking about the land where
people take the Tamogatchi (digital key chain pets) seriously, where
people will shell out $1000+ for a robot dog and kids will skip school
and stand in line for days (with their parents) buy a new video game
(happend first in the mid 80's with Dragon Quest III for the Famicom
game console and has happened numerious times sense).

The thing you haven't done is factor in Japanese culture. That plays a
big part as to why an adult citizen of Japan may choice to shell out
200,000 yen instead of save that money or spend it on something else.

Why don't we talk about over-the-air broad cast in Japan? How many
stations do they have now? How much prime time programming is
available in HD in Japan? What about subscription television services,
is HD-DVR an option in Japan?

The USA is the clear leader in available HD content, why we keep
coming back to how many Integrated HDTVs (HDTVs with built in digital
tuners) have been sold is beyond me. The survey data is flawed because
HD Ready sets should be included as well, US consumers can have HDTV
with an HD Ready set an a HD cable box or HD satellite box, trends
indicate the US consumers have selected this route. Walk into any
retailer and look at the number of HD Ready sets available on a floor
vs the number of HD integrated sets. I believe we're in the middle of
a transition that will bring us to where integrated sets are more
common place, but we aren't there yet and the 2006 DTV switch manidate
is a joke and we all know that won't happen.
Anonymous
November 29, 2004 10:41:44 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004, Bob Miller wrote:
> I expect a blowout for Christmas this year since more of
> the country will come on line with HDTV thru December.

What, pray tell, does Christmas have to HDTV sales in Japan?

For your information, Christmas is not a holiday in Japan. As a shopping
day, it is about on the same scale as Valentine's Day -- an excuse to give
small gifts to family members (and especially sweethearts) and to have a
drinking party that night.

Bob Miller's ignorance about Japan is truly staggering.

By the way, I've been investigating the Japanese video cellphones he's
been yammering about. There are, indeed, a few cellphones that receive
15fps video from the provider (not broadcast DTV).

Just released are a few very new cellphones (three or so models) that
receive broadcast television...*ANALOG* broadcast television. Golly gee,
a cellphone combined with a 1988-vintage Casio TV-410. There are *no*
cellphones that receive digital broadcast television.

Nor are there likely to be any digital broadcast television cellphones any
time soon. Leaving aside the technical issues, the 15fps video services
are premium services that are expected to generate considerable revenue at
anywhere from .2 to 2 yen (depending upon phone and technology) per 128
byte packet.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
November 29, 2004 10:41:44 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004, Matthew L. Martin wrote:
> The US has had a surplus of channels for a couple of decades. The transitions
> you are talking about are from few choices to many choices. That is what is
> driving those expansions.

True. In Tokyo, you have a choice of only about a dozen broadcast
analog channels. Elsewhere in Japan, the choice is much more limited.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
November 30, 2004 1:55:22 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Matthew L. Martin wrote:
> Bob Miller wrote:
>
>> With only 12 million homes capable of HDTV so far, 28 million by end
>> of 2005, Japan has sold 1.6 million digital TV sets in their first
>> year of broadcasting with multicasting and cell phone reception both
>> coming next year.
>>
>> http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/newse/20041129wo62.htm
>>
>
> Once again, bob posts a source that refutes his claim:
>
> "About 1.6 million television sets and tuners that are compatible with
> digital technology have been shipped out".
>
> Which, as we all know, includes units shipped to stores and reviewers.
> It says nothing about the number that consumers have purchased.

Sales thru to households must be high because sales to dealers rose 108%
above the previous month in July, 147% over July in August before
falling to 79% of August in September (post Olympics) and then jumping
to something close to 200% over September in October. Sales seem to be
following demand closely in Japan. I expect a blowout for Christmas this
year since more of the country will come on line with HDTV thru December.

It is in the US where very low volume production of OTA receivers and
even slower sales have caused cob webs to cover minuscule inventories of
receivers and even far fewer integrated OTA sets to cause Matthew to
think this way. Japan has very little inventory of integrated HDTV sets
and the velocity of sales is extreme compared to the US.

In addition, the number of US homes that are "capable of HDTV so far"
> (which in the above context means could receive an HD signal if they
> possessed the appropriate equipment) is close to 10 times that of Japan.

Again in Japan they have 48 million households and ONLY 12 million or
25% are capable of receiving HDTV and of that 25%, 13.3% can already
receive HDTV in there homes after ONLY ONE YEAR!!!

Matthew seems to think it is impressive that in the US where 90% + of
our 109 million households can receive HDTV IF THEY HAD THE EQUIPMENT,
around ONE lousy % HAVE THE EQUIPMENT AFTER 7 YEARS of trying!!!

>
> It also says that:
>
> "Although prices of digital TV sets have fallen, even 22-inch sets still
> cost more than 200,000 yen. Lowering prices is the key to increasing the
> number of households capable of receiving digital TV broadcasting".
>
> That's about $2000 for a 22 inch set. That's quite a lot more expensive
> than in the US. I would guess those prices have to drop substantially
> before the Japanese consumer really gets on the HD bandwagon.

Matthew fails to comprehend that having HDTV sets that are more
expensive in Japan than in the US makes the fact that they are selling
HDTV INTEGRATED sets like 100 times faster than we are even MORE
IMPRESSIVE!!!

That is in Japan where they only have three cities with HDTV broadcast
and where HDTV sets cost three times what they do in the US and where
they have been selling OTA HDTV integrated sets for all of ONE YEAR they
have sold 13% of the households capable of receiving said HDTV signals.

Similar figures occurred in the UK and Berlin where they had 12% and 13%
penetration after less than a year.

The US has around ONE% after 7 YEARS!!!

> Elsewhere it says:
>
> "This autumn, NHK Educational channel introduced its multiple
> programming function, through which viewers can watch two or three
> programs simultaneously on a single channel, although the picture
> quality will be the same as that of the analog format".
>
> Why only two or three subchannels? Is the datacasting they are doing
> really consuming that much bandwidth? That sounds like a losing
> proposition for a commercial station.

Commercial stations in the US and Japan only produced one program per
physical channel for the last 50 years. How does doing "only two or
three subchannels" or three to four times what they did analog become a
losing proposition? Sounds like a way to print money with OTA
broadcasting to me.
>
> Matthew
>
Anonymous
November 30, 2004 10:55:10 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

JDeats wrote:
> Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<XXKqd.3419$u81.2446@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
>
>>With only 12 million homes capable of HDTV so far, 28 million by end of
>>2005, Japan has sold 1.6 million digital TV sets in their first year of
>>broadcasting with multicasting and cell phone reception both coming next
>>year.
>>
>>http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/newse/20041129wo62.htm
>>
>>Bob Miller
>
>
> What's the point of this post? Given your history of post, I'll take
> this as another "look how far behind the USA is" post. If you look at
> Japan (behind this specific technology) you'll find they are country
> that loves to embrace technology. We're talking about the land where
> people take the Tamogatchi (digital key chain pets) seriously, where
> people will shell out $1000+ for a robot dog and kids will skip school
> and stand in line for days (with their parents) buy a new video game
> (happend first in the mid 80's with Dragon Quest III for the Famicom
> game console and has happened numerious times sense).
>
> The thing you haven't done is factor in Japanese culture. That plays a
> big part as to why an adult citizen of Japan may choice to shell out
> 200,000 yen instead of save that money or spend it on something else.
>
> Why don't we talk about over-the-air broad cast in Japan? How many
> stations do they have now? How much prime time programming is
> available in HD in Japan? What about subscription television services,
> is HD-DVR an option in Japan?
>
> The USA is the clear leader in available HD content, why we keep
> coming back to how many Integrated HDTVs (HDTVs with built in digital
> tuners) have been sold is beyond me. The survey data is flawed because
> HD Ready sets should be included as well, US consumers can have HDTV
> with an HD Ready set an a HD cable box or HD satellite box, trends
> indicate the US consumers have selected this route. Walk into any
> retailer and look at the number of HD Ready sets available on a floor
> vs the number of HD integrated sets. I believe we're in the middle of
> a transition that will bring us to where integrated sets are more
> common place, but we aren't there yet and the 2006 DTV switch manidate
> is a joke and we all know that won't happen.

My argument is that with the right modulation, COFDM, cable and
satellite are irrelevant. The mandate is irrelevant.

I don't know what the amount of HD content is in Japan or how many
stations they have or what their culture is. They are buying more HD
sets with OTA capability by far than the US is no matter what way you
measure it.

I would suggest that the culture of the US is such that with the right
modulation our aggressive entrepreneurial culture would have made the
digital transition happen. It would be all but over by now. There would
be 80+ million receivers in homes today. 2006 would be the real deal and
by now 500 broadcast stations would have voluntarily turned off their
analog transmitters with another 700 doing so in 2005.

Most TV sets sold today would come with COFDM receivers integrated at a
cost of as little as $25. Stand alone DTV COFDM receivers in the UK are
selling at $56.75 and that is not even on sale.

As of the end of August these were the figures. Since then they have
gone to 1.6 million end of October.
http://www.dibeg.org/news/news-3/news-e3.htm#dn039e

Of 1.346 million DTV receivers sold in the first NINE months, December
1st 2003 till August 31st 2004, of HDTV broadcasting in Japan 88,000
were stand alone receivers while 1.258 million were integrated.

Those crazy culturally mad Japanese actually buying HDTV sets with
receivers in them. They gotta be crazy, we need a MANDATE and we still
won't buy them.

Come up with all the phony excuses you want but the reality is very very
very simple. We have a lousy modulation that has not produced a decent
receiver as of yet. The American consumer is savvy. They listen to the
market in many ways. They have rejected 8-VSB.

The proof will be the advent of the 5th gen receiver. Sales will boom.
Receivers will be integrated. People will buy integrated sets if they
have 5th gen receivers in them.

Coulda happened and even better in 2001. Will happen beginning in 2005
at a higher cost than what it would have been in 2001.

Bob Miller
Anonymous
November 30, 2004 11:52:22 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Mark Crispin wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Nov 2004, Bob Miller wrote:
>
>> I expect a blowout for Christmas this year since more of the country
>> will come on line with HDTV thru December.
>
>
> What, pray tell, does Christmas have to HDTV sales in Japan?
>
> For your information, Christmas is not a holiday in Japan. As a
> shopping day, it is about on the same scale as Valentine's Day -- an
> excuse to give small gifts to family members (and especially
> sweethearts) and to have a drinking party that night.
>
> Bob Miller's ignorance about Japan is truly staggering.

In Japan Christmas is not like our Christmas exactly. But their gift
giving can be a lot wilder than "small gifts to family members". This is
the big bonus time of year in Japan and this year will be the best year
in a long time. Bonuses fuel gift giving at Christmas time in Japan and
as this article says....

http://www2.gol.com/users/kilburn/gifting.htm

"Each Christmas stores and manufacturers try to outdo each other with
bizarre gifting ideas. Gold is a popular theme.

In 1989, Hitachi offered gold plated refrigerators to brighten kitchen
drudgery. The ¥ 880,000 refrigerator was one of several products
intended to sate a fashionable lust for gold.

Mitsukoshi sold 11 golf clubs with heads of 18-carat gold. These
novelties retailed for ¥ 1.3 million each.

Another popular gold gift was imported from the UK. It was a set of 24
gold plates for ¥ 40 million.

"These are times when people will spend ¥ 30 million on mink covered
furniture. They feel it enhances the quality of life," said Akiharu
Arai, a Mitsukoshi spokesman.""

NOT ONLY will HDTV sets fit into this gift giving time but the numbers
will prove me right next February once again. And I reiterate, "I expect
a blowout for Christmas this year since more of the country will come on
line with HDTV thru December."
>
> By the way, I've been investigating the Japanese video cellphones he's
> been yammering about. There are, indeed, a few cellphones that receive
> 15fps video from the provider (not broadcast DTV).
>
> Just released are a few very new cellphones (three or so models) that
> receive broadcast television...*ANALOG* broadcast television. Golly
> gee, a cellphone combined with a 1988-vintage Casio TV-410. There are
> *no* cellphones that receive digital broadcast television.

Do some more "investigating" Mark. Here I did some for you.

http://www.deviceforge.com/news/NS4519453345.html

"According to TI, no single standard will be used worldwide. Instead, TI
believes, the most prevalent standards will be those that are open and
non-proprietary. These include Europe's "Digital Video Broadcasting,
Handheld" (DVB-H) and Japan's "Integrated Services Digital Broadcasting,
Terrestrial" (ISDB-T).

Dedicated wireless networks supporting these standards will feature
high-quality live broadcast TV (24-30 frames per second) paired with
full audio to offer a more robust mobile viewing experience versus the
one-to-15-frames-per-second streaming capability offered via cellular,
TI says."

http://www.itmedia.co.jp/mobile/0308/08/sanyo.html
http://www.bargainpda.com/default.asp?newsID=1543&showC...
http://www.wirelesswatch.jp/modules.php?name=News&file=...
http://www.japancorp.net/Article.Asp?Art_ID=5681
http://www.dvb.org/index.php?id=278
http://www.dvb.org/documents//DVB-H_Outline.pdf
http://press.nokia.com/PR/200411/966982_5.html

>
> Nor are there likely to be any digital broadcast television cellphones
> any time soon. Leaving aside the technical issues, the 15fps video
> services are premium services that are expected to generate considerable
> revenue at anywhere from .2 to 2 yen (depending upon phone and
> technology) per 128 byte packet.

All of the services planned and in testing have frame rates of 24-30
fps. DVB-H, T-DMB, S-DMB, ISDB-T and DMB-T are all COFDM modulations
that are and will be used to deliver high quality DTV to cell phones.

http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/200411/kt20041115171419...
http://www.newsfactor.com/story.xhtml?story_id=25379
http://www.esato.com/board/viewtopic.php?topic=75402

Nokia is in testing right now in Pittsburgh with cell phones that
receive DVB-H DTV.

What Mark is talking about is 3G stuff that is delivered over cell phone
spectrum ala Sprint. It is junk. It is dead on arrival.

Bob Miller
>
> -- Mark --
>
> http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
> Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
> Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
November 30, 2004 1:22:56 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Ummmm... It might have to do with them being a culture of rabid techno
freaks.



Bob Miller wrote:

> With only 12 million homes capable of HDTV so far, 28 million by end
> of 2005, Japan has sold 1.6 million digital TV sets in their first
> year of broadcasting with multicasting and cell phone reception both
> coming next year.
>
> http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/newse/20041129wo62.htm
>
> Bob Miller


--
Ric Seyler
Anonymous
November 30, 2004 2:54:31 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Matthew L. Martin (nothere@notnow.never) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> "Although prices of digital TV sets have fallen, even 22-inch sets still
> cost more than 200,000 yen. Lowering prices is the key to increasing the
> number of households capable of receiving digital TV broadcasting".
>
> That's about $2000 for a 22 inch set. That's quite a lot more expensive
> than in the US. I would guess those prices have to drop substantially
> before the Japanese consumer really gets on the HD bandwagon.

It also means that the *tuner* cost is basically irrelevant, which could
means that adding them doesn't change sales one bit. That's the exact
same situation as in the US with TVs in the >$2000 price range.

--
Jeff Rife |
SPAM bait: | http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/AngryTVGod.gif
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov |
spam@ftc.gov |
Anonymous
November 30, 2004 4:38:14 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller wrote:
> With only 12 million homes capable of HDTV so far, 28 million by end of
> 2005, Japan has sold 1.6 million digital TV sets in their first year of
> broadcasting with multicasting and cell phone reception both coming next
> year.
>
> http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/newse/20041129wo62.htm
>

I know one thing. The Japanese are not buying HDTVs for mobile use.

Matthew
Anonymous
November 30, 2004 7:47:01 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

RicSeyler wrote:
> Ummmm... It might have to do with them being a culture of rabid techno
> freaks.
>
>
>
> Bob Miller wrote:
>
>> With only 12 million homes capable of HDTV so far, 28 million by end
>> of 2005, Japan has sold 1.6 million digital TV sets in their first
>> year of broadcasting with multicasting and cell phone reception both
>> coming next year.
>>
>> http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/newse/20041129wo62.htm
>>
>> Bob Miller
>
>
>
Ya you think? Maybe the rest of the world too. We are the only sane
country while every other country is full of rabid teckno freaks. Or it
could be that we have a bad modulation 8-VSB while they have a better
one ISDB-T. Could it be that simple? I think so.

It seems that it is just one of those things an advanced country like
the US will never know or be able to find out.

Unless of course as Qualcomm, Crown Castle, XMRadio, Sirius, 802.11a and
g, WiLan and almost every other successful RF technology of the present
and near future are created and continue to grow using GROWN UP
modulations based on COFDM we might WAKE UP! Who knows?

Bob Miller
Anonymous
November 30, 2004 7:47:02 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller wrote:

> RicSeyler wrote:
>
>> Ummmm... It might have to do with them being a culture of rabid
>> techno freaks.
>>
>>
>>
>>
> Ya you think? Maybe the rest of the world too. We are the only sane
> country while every other country is full of rabid teckno freaks. Or
> it could be that we have a bad modulation 8-VSB while they have a
> better one ISDB-T. Could it be that simple? I think so.

LOL Gotcha Bob you hate 8-VSB. I still gotta go with the society of
techno freaks and the prime motivator. :-)

>
>
> It seems that it is just one of those things an advanced country like
> the US will never know or be able to find out.
>
> Unless of course as Qualcomm, Crown Castle, XMRadio, Sirius, 802.11a
> and g, WiLan and almost every other successful RF technology of the
> present and near future are created and continue to grow using GROWN
> UP modulations based on COFDM we might WAKE UP! Who knows?
>
> Bob Miller


--
Ric Seyler
Anonymous
November 30, 2004 8:25:42 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Jeff Rife wrote:
> Matthew L. Martin (nothere@notnow.never) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
>
>>"Although prices of digital TV sets have fallen, even 22-inch sets still
>>cost more than 200,000 yen. Lowering prices is the key to increasing the
>>number of households capable of receiving digital TV broadcasting".
>>
>>That's about $2000 for a 22 inch set. That's quite a lot more expensive
>>than in the US. I would guess those prices have to drop substantially
>>before the Japanese consumer really gets on the HD bandwagon.
>
>
> It also means that the *tuner* cost is basically irrelevant, which could
> means that adding them doesn't change sales one bit. That's the exact
> same situation as in the US with TVs in the >$2000 price range.
>
First Matthew's statement "before the Japanese consumer really gets on
the HD bandwagon". If the Japanese consumer, who has bought 1.6 million
HDTV receivers in only 10 months of which 1.5 million are integrated
HDTV sets, is not on the "bandwagon" yet what must that bandwagon be? A
billion set a month?

And what does it say for the "bandwagon" the US is on with less than ONE
percent of our households with any kind of OTA receiver?

As to Jeff's dismissal of Economics One thru one hundred I would say I
think any extra cost diminishes demand. Any extra tuner not needed is a
waste of time and materials.

But he is right as far as the reason for slow sales in the US. The price
of 8-VSB tuners is a small part of the tragedy that is our digital
transition. It would not hurt if we could have 8-VSB receivers that are
as cheap as the $58 COFDM receivers sold in the UK and the higher
prices do slow sales but the real reason is that 8-VSB receivers don't
work up to any standards, there are none, and there are none for a
reason. No one could make a receiver up to the most minimum of standards.

I don't think even the 5th gen receiver could meet such a standard so
don't expect anyone to propose one any time soon.

Not having a receiver that works very well impedes the transition by
stifling all the plans that would be being pursued like USDTV if a
retailer, service provider or broadcaster could rely on there being
receivers that didn't require a service call to install.

USDTV is now going to be financed by a number of broadcasters probably
based on the imminent arrival of the 5th gen receivers. The ones that
work pretty well.

Bob Miller
Anonymous
November 30, 2004 8:25:43 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> First Matthew's statement "before the Japanese consumer really gets on
> the HD bandwagon". If the Japanese consumer, who has bought 1.6 million
> HDTV receivers in only 10 months of which 1.5 million are integrated
> HDTV sets

There are no numbers that back up this claim.

The article only says that a total of 1.6M units have been sold, and that
the "units" are either HDTV-ready displays (i.e., they need an add-on tuner),
integrated HDTVs, or standalone digital tuners.

--
Jeff Rife | "I'm putting on a happy face...I'm taking the
SPAM bait: | high road.... It's just three hours out of my
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov | life, and, oh yes, I'm drinking straight vodka."
spam@ftc.gov | -- Caroline Duffy, "Caroline In The City"
Anonymous
December 1, 2004 12:27:10 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Jeff Rife wrote:
> Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
>
>>First Matthew's statement "before the Japanese consumer really gets on
>>the HD bandwagon". If the Japanese consumer, who has bought 1.6 million
>>HDTV receivers in only 10 months of which 1.5 million are integrated
>>HDTV sets
>
>
> There are no numbers that back up this claim.
>
> The article only says that a total of 1.6M units have been sold, and that
> the "units" are either HDTV-ready displays (i.e., they need an add-on tuner),
> integrated HDTVs, or standalone digital tuners.
>
There were numbers to back it up. You might have missed them.

http://www.dibeg.org/news/news-3/news-e3.htm#dn039e

This only goes thru the end of August. September and October numbers
bring the total sale of "receivers" both stand alone and integrated to
1.6 million from the 1.346 Million at the end of August.

The article specifies how this number compares to ALL TV set sales.

"For the month of August, terrestrial digital TVs accounted for 19.1% of
all color TV sets, a decline of 1.5 percentage points from July.

Terrestrial digital TVs accounted for 7.1% of CRTs (no change from the
previous month), 89.3% of PDPs (down 0.6 points), and 38.1% of LCDs
(down 0.2 points)."

If digital TV sales at the end of August are 1.346 million which in turn
is 19.1% of all TV sales then all TV sales are 17.115 million.

There are no figures for monitors with no tuners. You wouldn't expect
there to be since their modulation, ISDB-T, works so well that most
people would not be worried about it being locked into their display
creating a DTV.

For example with 5th gen 8-VSB receivers I doubt if there will be
anywhere near the resistance to integrated HD sets in the US.

Bob Miller
Anonymous
December 1, 2004 12:27:11 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller wrote:

>
> There are no figures for monitors with no tuners. You wouldn't expect
> there to be since their modulation, ISDB-T, works so well that most
> people would not be worried about it being locked into their display
> creating a DTV.
>
> For example with 5th gen 8-VSB receivers I doubt if there will be
> anywhere near the resistance to integrated HD sets in the US.
>

Keep that spin going, bob.

There has been no consumer resistance to ATSC in the US. If the FCC had
taken their marching orders seriously instead of idealogically, they
would have mandated cable ready, CAM enabled, ATSC tuners for all HD
sets day one. It is well understood that people can't buy products that
aren't available.

Matthew
Anonymous
December 1, 2004 12:40:06 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Jeff Rife wrote:
> > Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> >
> >>First Matthew's statement "before the Japanese consumer really gets on
> >>the HD bandwagon". If the Japanese consumer, who has bought 1.6
> >>million HDTV receivers in only 10 months of which 1.5 million are
> >>integrated HDTV sets
> >
> >
> > There are no numbers that back up this claim.
> >
> > The article only says that a total of 1.6M units have been sold, and
> > that the "units" are either HDTV-ready displays (i.e., they need an
> > add-on tuner), integrated HDTVs, or standalone digital tuners.
> >
> There were numbers to back it up. You might have missed them.
>
> http://www.dibeg.org/news/news-3/news-e3.htm#dn039e
>
> This only goes thru the end of August. September and October numbers
> bring the total sale of "receivers" both stand alone and integrated to
> 1.6 million from the 1.346 Million at the end of August.
>
> The article specifies how this number compares to ALL TV set sales.
>
> "For the month of August, terrestrial digital TVs accounted for 19.1% of
> all color TV sets, a decline of 1.5 percentage points from July.
>
> Terrestrial digital TVs accounted for 7.1% of CRTs (no change from the
> previous month), 89.3% of PDPs (down 0.6 points), and 38.1% of LCDs
> (down 0.2 points)."
>
> If digital TV sales at the end of August are 1.346 million which in turn
> is 19.1% of all TV sales then all TV sales are 17.115 million.
>
> There are no figures for monitors with no tuners. You wouldn't expect
> there to be since their modulation, ISDB-T, works so well that most
> people would not be worried about it being locked into their display
> creating a DTV.
>
> For example with 5th gen 8-VSB receivers I doubt if there will be
> anywhere near the resistance to integrated HD sets in the US.
>
> Bob Miller

So you are saying that when the 5th generation receivers are out that the
US public will embrace them and start buying integrated sets even though
most people get their HD content from a cable box or DBS box and do not
need them in their televisions. Oh yeah, I forgot. You do not care about
HD. Chip

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
Anonymous
December 1, 2004 1:13:42 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

cjdaytonjrnospam@cox.net wrote:
> Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>Jeff Rife wrote:
>>
>>>Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
>>>
>>>
>>>>First Matthew's statement "before the Japanese consumer really gets on
>>>>the HD bandwagon". If the Japanese consumer, who has bought 1.6
>>>>million HDTV receivers in only 10 months of which 1.5 million are
>>>>integrated HDTV sets
>>>
>>>
>>>There are no numbers that back up this claim.
>>>
>>>The article only says that a total of 1.6M units have been sold, and
>>>that the "units" are either HDTV-ready displays (i.e., they need an
>>>add-on tuner), integrated HDTVs, or standalone digital tuners.
>>>
>>
>>There were numbers to back it up. You might have missed them.
>>
>>http://www.dibeg.org/news/news-3/news-e3.htm#dn039e
>>
>>This only goes thru the end of August. September and October numbers
>>bring the total sale of "receivers" both stand alone and integrated to
>>1.6 million from the 1.346 Million at the end of August.
>>
>>The article specifies how this number compares to ALL TV set sales.
>>
>>"For the month of August, terrestrial digital TVs accounted for 19.1% of
>>all color TV sets, a decline of 1.5 percentage points from July.
>>
>>Terrestrial digital TVs accounted for 7.1% of CRTs (no change from the
>>previous month), 89.3% of PDPs (down 0.6 points), and 38.1% of LCDs
>>(down 0.2 points)."
>>
>>If digital TV sales at the end of August are 1.346 million which in turn
>>is 19.1% of all TV sales then all TV sales are 17.115 million.
>>
>>There are no figures for monitors with no tuners. You wouldn't expect
>>there to be since their modulation, ISDB-T, works so well that most
>>people would not be worried about it being locked into their display
>>creating a DTV.
>>
>>For example with 5th gen 8-VSB receivers I doubt if there will be
>>anywhere near the resistance to integrated HD sets in the US.
>>
>>Bob Miller
>
>
> So you are saying that when the 5th generation receivers are out that the
> US public will embrace them and start buying integrated sets even though
> most people get their HD content from a cable box or DBS box and do not
> need them in their televisions. Oh yeah, I forgot. You do not care about
> HD. Chip
>
Yes I am saying that. In Berlin they have a 95% cable and satellite
penetration and in the first NINE months terrestrial COFDM DTV receivers
were sold to 13% of all households.

The US does not even have 95%. Some say it is as low as 80% cable and
satellite penetration. I expect terrestrial to do better in the US than
in places like Berlin. Especially in big cities where consumers have
little choice between high cost cable and high cost satellite. In fact
many in cities can't get satellite so they are held hostage by cable.

Rates are far higher in the US for cable also so I think you will see a
truly incredible uptake in terrestrial broadcasting services competing
and successfully with cable and satellite.

I think HD is great. What is there not to like about HD? What I hate and
the only thing I hate is the take over of the digital transition in the
US by the Consumer Electronics Association and its members. Something
that other countries were able to withstand. We were not. Our government
got bought.

Yes I truly hate that. And it is not as if the two systems are equal are
even in the same ballpark. 8-VSB is not even in the interest of those
who pushed it in the first place. Something I think they have come to
realize. At least some of them. (Harris for one)

All that 8-VSB has done is delay the digital transition and delay HD
both OTA and because of OTA it delayed HD in cable and satellite as well
as in many other countries.

If you are for HDTV you should be dead set against 8-VSB.

Bob Miller
Anonymous
December 1, 2004 1:29:03 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Matthew L. Martin wrote:
> Bob Miller wrote:
>
>>
>> There are no figures for monitors with no tuners. You wouldn't expect
>> there to be since their modulation, ISDB-T, works so well that most
>> people would not be worried about it being locked into their display
>> creating a DTV.
>>
>> For example with 5th gen 8-VSB receivers I doubt if there will be
>> anywhere near the resistance to integrated HD sets in the US.
>>
>
> Keep that spin going, bob.
>
> There has been no consumer resistance to ATSC in the US. If the FCC had
> taken their marching orders seriously instead of idealogically, they
> would have mandated cable ready, CAM enabled, ATSC tuners for all HD
> sets day one. It is well understood that people can't buy products that
> aren't available.
>
> Matthew

Why leave out satellite? Why leave out broadband Internet? Have a a
media center built in? If your going to mandate mandate everything. Why
give the consumer a choice if you don't have to?

Why not encrust everything with everything.

This is only TV we are talking about. It is not life and death. Why not
mandate all safety devices found in NASCAR race cars for the family
sedan? You would actually save lives, quite a few in fact.

Why would I want to buy a cable and ATSC ready DTV set when all I want
is satellite? That is a double whammy waste.

The reality is that after a seven year waste we will now begin a
truncated digital transition that will see MAJOR competition for cable
and satellite. The only thing holding up all this now is the cable must
carry issue. If broadcasters get must carry of their multicast signal
watch out. Things will move VERY fast.

If they do not get must carry it will still happen but much more slowly.

It isn't that "people can't buy products that aren't available". They
are not available for a reason. OTA 8-VSB receivers were not put into
integrated sets because retailers didn't want to have to retrieve the
non performing large screen DTV because the customer couldn't get
reception two miles from the transmitter.

In fact retailers and manufacturers didn't get real excited about stand
alone receivers for the same reason.

Bob Miller
Anonymous
December 1, 2004 1:29:04 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller wrote:
> Matthew L. Martin wrote:
>
>> Bob Miller wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> There are no figures for monitors with no tuners. You wouldn't expect
>>> there to be since their modulation, ISDB-T, works so well that most
>>> people would not be worried about it being locked into their display
>>> creating a DTV.
>>>
>>> For example with 5th gen 8-VSB receivers I doubt if there will be
>>> anywhere near the resistance to integrated HD sets in the US.
>>>
>>
>> Keep that spin going, bob.
>>
>> There has been no consumer resistance to ATSC in the US. If the FCC
>> had taken their marching orders seriously instead of idealogically,
>> they would have mandated cable ready, CAM enabled, ATSC tuners for all
>> HD sets day one. It is well understood that people can't buy products
>> that aren't available.
>>
>> Matthew
>
>
> Why leave out satellite? Why leave out broadband Internet? Have a a
> media center built in? If your going to mandate mandate everything. Why
> give the consumer a choice if you don't have to?
>
> Why not encrust everything with everything.

This is classic bob. Change the subject instead or addressing the point
made.

Matthew


--
Thermodynamics and/or Golf for dummies: There is a game
You can't win
You can't break even
You can't get out of the game
Anonymous
December 1, 2004 4:04:21 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote:
> cjdaytonjrnospam@cox.net wrote:
> > Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> >>Jeff Rife wrote:
> >>
> >>>Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>First Matthew's statement "before the Japanese consumer really gets
> >>>>on the HD bandwagon". If the Japanese consumer, who has bought 1.6
> >>>>million HDTV receivers in only 10 months of which 1.5 million are
> >>>>integrated HDTV sets
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>There are no numbers that back up this claim.
> >>>
> >>>The article only says that a total of 1.6M units have been sold, and
> >>>that the "units" are either HDTV-ready displays (i.e., they need an
> >>>add-on tuner), integrated HDTVs, or standalone digital tuners.
> >>>
> >>
> >>There were numbers to back it up. You might have missed them.
> >>
> >>http://www.dibeg.org/news/news-3/news-e3.htm#dn039e
> >>
> >>This only goes thru the end of August. September and October numbers
> >>bring the total sale of "receivers" both stand alone and integrated to
> >>1.6 million from the 1.346 Million at the end of August.
> >>
> >>The article specifies how this number compares to ALL TV set sales.
> >>
> >>"For the month of August, terrestrial digital TVs accounted for 19.1%
> >>of all color TV sets, a decline of 1.5 percentage points from July.
> >>
> >>Terrestrial digital TVs accounted for 7.1% of CRTs (no change from the
> >>previous month), 89.3% of PDPs (down 0.6 points), and 38.1% of LCDs
> >>(down 0.2 points)."
> >>
> >>If digital TV sales at the end of August are 1.346 million which in
> >>turn is 19.1% of all TV sales then all TV sales are 17.115 million.
> >>
> >>There are no figures for monitors with no tuners. You wouldn't expect
> >>there to be since their modulation, ISDB-T, works so well that most
> >>people would not be worried about it being locked into their display
> >>creating a DTV.
> >>
> >>For example with 5th gen 8-VSB receivers I doubt if there will be
> >>anywhere near the resistance to integrated HD sets in the US.
> >>
> >>Bob Miller
> >
> >
> > So you are saying that when the 5th generation receivers are out that
> > the US public will embrace them and start buying integrated sets even
> > though most people get their HD content from a cable box or DBS box and
> > do not need them in their televisions. Oh yeah, I forgot. You do not
> > care about HD. Chip
> >
> Yes I am saying that. In Berlin they have a 95% cable and satellite
> penetration and in the first NINE months terrestrial COFDM DTV receivers
> were sold to 13% of all households.
>
> The US does not even have 95%. Some say it is as low as 80% cable and
> satellite penetration. I expect terrestrial to do better in the US than
> in places like Berlin. Especially in big cities where consumers have
> little choice between high cost cable and high cost satellite. In fact
> many in cities can't get satellite so they are held hostage by cable.
>
> Rates are far higher in the US for cable also so I think you will see a
> truly incredible uptake in terrestrial broadcasting services competing
> and successfully with cable and satellite.
>
> I think HD is great. What is there not to like about HD? What I hate and
> the only thing I hate is the take over of the digital transition in the
> US by the Consumer Electronics Association and its members. Something
> that other countries were able to withstand. We were not. Our government
> got bought.
>
> Yes I truly hate that. And it is not as if the two systems are equal are
> even in the same ballpark. 8-VSB is not even in the interest of those
> who pushed it in the first place. Something I think they have come to
> realize. At least some of them. (Harris for one)
>
> All that 8-VSB has done is delay the digital transition and delay HD
> both OTA and because of OTA it delayed HD in cable and satellite as well
> as in many other countries.
>
> If you are for HDTV you should be dead set against 8-VSB.
>
> Bob Miller

Gee Bob, I have had an HD set for two years. I have two now,
one with and one without a digital tuner. The one with I bought
because I was too stupid to know that all Directv HD boxes have
an HD ota tuner in them. Otherwise I would not have bought an
integrated set. I have two Directv HD boxes. All three are 8-VSB!
I love them. They get great reception. I am NOT "dead set against
8-VSB. Why should I be? It works fine where I am in Connecticut.
Chip

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
December 1, 2004 7:54:34 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

In article <9u1rd.7779$NU3.7438@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote:

> Ya you think? Maybe the rest of the world too. We are the only sane
> country while every other country is full of rabid teckno freaks. Or it
> could be that we have a bad modulation 8-VSB while they have a better
> one ISDB-T. Could it be that simple? I think so.

Or could it be that some people just can't let it go? That the ship has
long sailed and some poor souls are pounding their fists at the pier?

Could it be that plain? I think so.
December 1, 2004 7:56:59 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

In article <yHVqd.3872$u81.315@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote:

> Most TV sets sold today would come with COFDM receivers integrated at a
> cost of as little as $25.

Broadcast network TV is losing viewership to cable or pay TV channels,
to the Internet, to video games, etc.

So no, there wouldn't be no stampede to buy HDTV tuners because you
supposedly could get better reception of CSI.
Anonymous
December 1, 2004 8:46:58 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

poldy wrote:
> In article <yHVqd.3872$u81.315@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
> Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Most TV sets sold today would come with COFDM receivers integrated at a
>>cost of as little as $25.
>
>
> Broadcast network TV is losing viewership to cable or pay TV channels,
> to the Internet, to video games, etc.
>
> So no, there wouldn't be no stampede to buy HDTV tuners because you
> supposedly could get better reception of CSI.

How to decipher that last sentence. What do you mean? Should I remove
one, two or three negatives? Give me a clue.
Anonymous
December 1, 2004 9:51:37 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

On Wed, 1 Dec 2004, Herve Benoit wrote:
>>> Good points but in Berlin the lie is being put to your model.
>> Berlin does not have HDTV.
> So what ? This has nothing to do with the merits of the modulation used.

This has everything to do with the purpose of alt.tv.tech.hdtv, to which
Bob Miller posted his stupid flame.

Berlin does not have HDTV, therefore Berlin's broadcast system is of no
interest to the membership of alt.tv.tech.hdtv. Bob Miller keeps on
babbling about Berlin on alt.tv.tech.hdtv in an attempt to claim that,
somehow, COFDM is superior to 8-VSB.

Most deployments of COFDM based digital TV have not been HDTV. Almost all
deployments of 8-VSB based digital TV have been HDTV; and most of the few
that were originally EDTV have since upgraded to HDTV.

This suggests that COFDM based digital TV is primarily of interest when
HDTV is not an issue. Probably, the impulse noise problem of COFDM will
forever condemn viewer in COFDM countries not to have HDTV.

Meanwhile, almost the entire USA has HDTV.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 2:22:58 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Mark Crispin" <MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU> a écrit dans le message de
news:p ine.WNT.4.62.0411302030150.576@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU...
> On Wed, 1 Dec 2004, Bob Miller wrote:
> > Good points but in Berlin the lie is being put to your model.
>
> Berlin does not have HDTV.
>
So what ? This has nothing to do with the merits of the modulation used.
>
> This was a city that had *two* analog color systems. I don't know if they
> cleaned that up post-reunification, or used the DTV transition to do that.
>
SECAM in East Germany was stopped very shortly after the reunification, more
than 12 years ago!
(all receivers in the East were PAL/SECAM, so it was easy).
This has strictly nothing to do with digital transition there.
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 2:22:59 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Hervé Benoit (herve.benoit1@free.fr) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> "Mark Crispin" <MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU> a écrit dans le message de
> news:p ine.WNT.4.62.0411302030150.576@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU...
> > Berlin does not have HDTV.
> >
> So what ? This has nothing to do with the merits of the modulation used.

Actually, it does.

It's possible to choose a modulation scheme that does better at low
bitrate data in a given bandwidth if you know that high bitrate (i.e., HD)
is never going to happen.

COFDM happens to have this property: impulse noise problems increase
dramatically when the bitrate is increased and bandwidth is not also
increased to compensate, yet it works OK with SD.

--
Jeff Rife |
SPAM bait: | http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/Dilbert/ActualCode.gif
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov |
spam@ftc.gov |
December 2, 2004 3:13:12 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

In article <9u1rd.7779$NU3.7438@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
robmx@earthlink.net says...
> RicSeyler wrote:
> > Ummmm... It might have to do with them being a culture of rabid techno
> > freaks.
> >
> >
> >
> > Bob Miller wrote:
> >
> >> With only 12 million homes capable of HDTV so far, 28 million by end
> >> of 2005, Japan has sold 1.6 million digital TV sets in their first
> >> year of broadcasting with multicasting and cell phone reception both
> >> coming next year.
> >>
> >> http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/newse/20041129wo62.htm
> >>
> >> Bob Miller
> >
> >
> >
> Ya you think?

Yes.

> Maybe the rest of the world too. We are the only sane
> country while every other country is full of rabid teckno freaks.

No. Just Japan.

> Or it
> could be that we have a bad modulation 8-VSB while they have a better
> one ISDB-T. Could it be that simple? I think so.

Think whatever you want. Everyone else here thinks differently though.

> It seems that it is just one of those things an advanced country like
> the US will never know or be able to find out.

They really don't care.

> Unless of course as Qualcomm, Crown Castle, XMRadio, Sirius, 802.11a and
> g, WiLan and almost every other successful RF technology of the present
> and near future are created and continue to grow using GROWN UP
> modulations based on COFDM we might WAKE UP! Who knows?

You apparently think you do. But your failing utterly at convincing the
rest of us. I most certainly do not care about OTA TV in *any* format,
and would avoid paying a premium for a set that supported it. Period.
That sentiment goes for millions. It doesn't matter what modulation is
used we just -don't care-. This isn't Japan. This isn't Europe. OTA is
just not as important here. Personally I think its a cultural
difference. I haven't tuned into OTA programming in 20 years.. OTA is
much more 'important' in Europe than here, and Japan...is a good place
to look at technology, but its futile and pointless to try and suggest
that technology that succeeds in Japan will work *anywhere* else.

Given there is no way to further either side of the argument stop
beating the horse. Its dead.
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 3:45:11 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Jeff Rife wrote:
> Hervé Benoit (herve.benoit1@free.fr) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
>
>>"Mark Crispin" <MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU> a écrit dans le message de
>>news:p ine.WNT.4.62.0411302030150.576@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU...
>>
>>>Berlin does not have HDTV.
>>>
>>
>>So what ? This has nothing to do with the merits of the modulation used.
>
>
> Actually, it does.
>
> It's possible to choose a modulation scheme that does better at low
> bitrate data in a given bandwidth if you know that high bitrate (i.e., HD)
> is never going to happen.

What does that mean? COFDM does better at 19.76 Mbps mobile than 8-VSB
does at 19.34 Mbps fixed reception. (Congressional COFDM/8-VSB hearings
2000)
>
> COFDM happens to have this property: impulse noise problems increase
> dramatically when the bitrate is increased and bandwidth is not also
> increased to compensate, yet it works OK with SD.
>
Bitrate can be adjusted using COFDM to allow for a more robust reception
in the presence of multipath. Lowering the bitrate has no affect on
impulse noise. I think you have mixed up multipath with impulse noise.

BTW when I turn on or off my desk lamp within two feet of my Samsung or
LG 8-VSB receivers the picture hiccups. Every time! Could that be
impulse noise?

COFDM was able to deliver HD to a mobile receiver at a higher bit rate
per HZ than 8-VSB uses in the US for fixed reception in an Australian test.

And this was on the highways and byways of Sydney where you should
expect a lot of impulse noise from all those vehicles.

Page 13
http://www.dvb.org/documents/newsletters/DVB-SCENE-08.p...

Bob Miller
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 5:03:41 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller wrote:
[snip]
>
> I think HD is great. What is there not to like about HD? What I hate
> and the only thing I hate is the take over of the digital transition
> in the US by the Consumer Electronics Association and its members.
> Something that other countries were able to withstand. We were not.
> Our government got bought.

Interestingly the UK Consumer Electronics industry has complained recently
that the publicity for Freeview (the generic name for DVB-T FTA in the UK -
though technically the Freeview consortium only 4 out of the 6 UK DVB-T
multiplexes) has concentrated on telling people they don't need to replace
their TV to upgrade to OTA digital TV and can instead purchase a low cost
external set-top box for around GBP50 (a conservative estimate, I think the
cheapest are around GPB30 these days) to receive all the channels with their
existing TV. (Most of the Freeview information is carried on the BBC -
which has 2 of the 6 UK multiplexes - and is commercial free - and keen for
as many viewers as possible to be able to receive their digital services.
Freeview is particularly good for the BBC as they have 1/3 of the broadcast
space, and many receivers aren't capable of supporting encryption...)

Hmmm - why would a trade body representing equipment manufacturers and
retailers be more concerned with selling GBP500 integrated digital TVs
rather than GBP50 set top boxes??? I wonder which they make the greater
profit on.

I think the Freeview view would be that they aren't in the business of
selling TVs - they are in the business of getting as many people as possible
to switch over.

Their sales pitch of 30+ rather than 5 channels (excluding the digital radio
services also carried), for a single, low, one-off cost, with 16:9 (and in
some cases improved picture quality over analogue OTA) and interactive TV
services, does still seem to be a big driving force. Whether HD versions of
the original 5 networks would have had the same driving force I don't
know... (I'd have liked it...)

Steve
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 5:31:58 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Mark Crispin wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Dec 2004, Bob Miller wrote:
>> Good points but in Berlin the lie is being put to your model.
>
> Berlin does not have HDTV.

Nope - but neither does it have any analogue OTA terrestrial - they have an
entirely DVB-T based digital terrestrial system. They have chosen to run at
quite a low data rate on some of their muxes - presumably to make reception
very easy (I believe set-top aerials - or antennae - are quite popular in
Germany - they are less common in the UK where rooftop aerials pointing at a
single transmitter location for all services is more common)

They are running at 14.5 and 12.9 Mbs in VHF (one with a more robust FEC
than the other) - at low powers of around 5-10kW and 14.75Mbs at UHF at
10-120kW - but they have chosen 16QAM and 2/3 rather than 3/4 FEC so are
delivering an incredibly robust signal. They are also using the 8k variant -
so they can utilise single frequency working (allowing multiple fill-in
transmitters to run on the same channels to improve coverage)

You are right - the Berlin system is designed to deliver multiple SD rather
than single HD. I suspect they would be able to increase their data payload
if they were able to increase transmitter power, reduce the FEC and/or move
to 64QAM - but this would make the signal less robust and less easy to
receive. They have obviously aimed at ensuring low quality aerials work.

>
> This was a city that had *two* analog color systems. I don't know if
> they cleaned that up post-reunification, or used the DTV transition
> to do that.

Nope - it was cleared up pretty quickly post-reunification I believe. AIUI
most receivers sold in Berlin prior to reunification (or very soon after)
were already SECAM/PAL dual standard (quite common in many European areas) -
so switching the East to PAL didn't need a huge replacement campaign in the
same way switching off analogue would do.

Analogue satellite has very high German penetration (it is one of the few
countries in Europe with a large analogue satellite operation AIUI) as the
reunification happened at around the same time as the first analogue
direct-to-home satellites launched (Astra 1 being the one favoured by
Germany) The German commercial and state networks (national and regional)
were all quickly carried on satellite - analogue PAL - and allowed for
out-of-region viewing, and I guess allowed quick roll out of these services
to the areas formerly in East Germany?
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 8:36:00 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Mark Crispin wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Dec 2004, Herve Benoit wrote:
>
>>>> Good points but in Berlin the lie is being put to your model.
>>>
>>> Berlin does not have HDTV.
>>
>> So what ? This has nothing to do with the merits of the modulation used.
>
>
> This has everything to do with the purpose of alt.tv.tech.hdtv, to which
> Bob Miller posted his stupid flame.
>
> Berlin does not have HDTV, therefore Berlin's broadcast system is of no
> interest to the membership of alt.tv.tech.hdtv. Bob Miller keeps on
> babbling about Berlin on alt.tv.tech.hdtv in an attempt to claim that,
> somehow, COFDM is superior to 8-VSB.
>
> Most deployments of COFDM based digital TV have not been HDTV. Almost
> all deployments of 8-VSB based digital TV have been HDTV; and most of
> the few that were originally EDTV have since upgraded to HDTV.
>
> This suggests that COFDM based digital TV is primarily of interest when
> HDTV is not an issue. Probably, the impulse noise problem of COFDM will
> forever condemn viewer in COFDM countries not to have HDTV.

There is no impulse noise problem hampering the sales of DTV OTA
receivers in Japan or Australia and they are both doing HDTV with COFDM.
There are four countries that have signed on to both HDTV and 8-VSB.
Mexico is doing nothing while Canada is barely doing something. The only
countries doing something with 8-VSB are the US and S. Korea.

The US has a stagnant OTA transition while I am not sure what Korea is
doing but it is probably doing better.

In the COFDM corner we have Japan doing spectacularly well with only ONE
year into it with 80% of the county being covered by the end of 2006.
Australia is doing 13 or so times better than the US with sales now
spiking on what looks like a hockey puck graph. France will be doing HD
sometime next year. There will be more countries doing HD with COFDM in
the future which I think is highly unlikely with 8-VSB.

It is left to speculation just how many countries would be doing HD if
the US has adopted a COFDM modulation. It is my contention that many
more would be doing HD and that we all would be much further along if
the US had done the leadership thing instead of the political hack job
that it did.
>
> Meanwhile, almost the entire USA has HDTV.

Meanwhile the US has most of its broadcasters doing the minimum required
to maintain their licenses while consumers seem to be under no such
mandate to buy mandated DTV sets. Quite a different way of putting it
than to say "almost the entire USA has HDTV" which is sadly pathetic.

Bob Miller
>
> -- Mark --
>
> http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
> Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
> Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 8:57:43 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Stephen Neal wrote:
> Bob Miller wrote:
> [snip]
>
>>I think HD is great. What is there not to like about HD? What I hate
>>and the only thing I hate is the take over of the digital transition
>>in the US by the Consumer Electronics Association and its members.
>>Something that other countries were able to withstand. We were not.
>>Our government got bought.
>
>
> Interestingly the UK Consumer Electronics industry has complained recently
> that the publicity for Freeview (the generic name for DVB-T FTA in the UK -
> though technically the Freeview consortium only 4 out of the 6 UK DVB-T
> multiplexes) has concentrated on telling people they don't need to replace
> their TV to upgrade to OTA digital TV and can instead purchase a low cost
> external set-top box for around GBP50 (a conservative estimate, I think the
> cheapest are around GPB30 these days) to receive all the channels with their
> existing TV. (Most of the Freeview information is carried on the BBC -
> which has 2 of the 6 UK multiplexes - and is commercial free - and keen for
> as many viewers as possible to be able to receive their digital services.
> Freeview is particularly good for the BBC as they have 1/3 of the broadcast
> space, and many receivers aren't capable of supporting encryption...)
>
> Hmmm - why would a trade body representing equipment manufacturers and
> retailers be more concerned with selling GBP500 integrated digital TVs
> rather than GBP50 set top boxes??? I wonder which they make the greater
> profit on.
>
> I think the Freeview view would be that they aren't in the business of
> selling TVs - they are in the business of getting as many people as possible
> to switch over.

Exactly right!!! In the US the FCC and our Congress should have been on
the consumer side fighting for what is best for consumers. They were
not. They were in the pockets of big business. The same can be said for
beef, cotton, sugar, drugs and oil. And the list goes on, broadcasting,
consumer electronics etc. If you add up all the money being fleeced from
the US taxpayer by our bribe based political system it may be as much as
30% after taxes.

Our Republican President talks of cutting taxes while he pays for his
spending by running the dollar down. The dollar has lost over 25% of its
value against the Euro in just the last two years. That is a tax on
every dollar you have ever made and every dollar ever saved by anyone in
the US.

The ugliest tax of all and a very pernicious form of unamericanism by
those who would use it consciously to cover thier policy mistakes.
Another form of the supposedly "easy way out" way of governing. This is
not the Republican party of Reagan and Bush Senior.

Bob Miller
>
> Their sales pitch of 30+ rather than 5 channels (excluding the digital radio
> services also carried), for a single, low, one-off cost, with 16:9 (and in
> some cases improved picture quality over analogue OTA) and interactive TV
> services, does still seem to be a big driving force. Whether HD versions of
> the original 5 networks would have had the same driving force I don't
> know... (I'd have liked it...)

The UK will have HD via satellite.
>
> Steve
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 1:17:29 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

On Thu, 2 Dec 2004, Bob Miller wrote:
> There is no impulse noise problem hampering the sales of DTV OTA receivers in
> Japan or Australia and they are both doing HDTV with COFDM.

That is not what the reports from Japan and Australia are saying.

Furthermore, I'm about to do a first-hand investigation of the HDTV
situation in Japan. In about a month's time I shall be rubbing your face
with the facts as opposed to your misinterpretations.

I already know the facts, but I'm going to wait until I have personally
verified each one.

> The US has a stagnant OTA transition

Stagnant? Then what explains all those HDTV systems being sold every day
from Best Buy, Circuit City, Sears, Wal-Mart, Target, etc.?

What explains all those UHF yagis showing up on rooftops?

> In the COFDM corner we have Japan doing spectacularly well with only ONE year
> into it with 80% of the county being covered by the end of 2006.

That does not match with the facts.

> Meanwhile the US has most of its broadcasters doing the minimum required to
> maintain their licenses while consumers seem to be under no such mandate to
> buy mandated DTV sets.

For most people in North America, analog TV works just fine. Cable and
satellite did an excellent job of solving reception quality problems.
The only people who have any need (or desire) to switch to digital TV are
those people who want HDTV.

> Quite a different way of putting it than to say
> "almost the entire USA has HDTV" which is sadly pathetic.

What is pathetic is you and your psychotic crusade.

Anyone who wants HDTV, almost everywhere in the USA, can have it. That is
not the case in any other country in the world. HDTV is available over
the air in every major market. HDTV is available from many cable systems,
and all satellite systems.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 1:20:43 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

On Thu, 2 Dec 2004, Bob Miller wrote:
> Our Republican President talks of cutting taxes while he pays for his
> spending by running the dollar down. The dollar has lost over 25% of its
> value against the Euro in just the last two years. That is a tax on every
> dollar you have ever made and every dollar ever saved by anyone in the US.

What's the matter, Psycho Bob?

That COFDM equipment from Europe is becoming too expensive for you?

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 10:20:02 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller wrote:
> Jeff Rife wrote:
>
>> Hervé Benoit (herve.benoit1@free.fr) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
>>
>>> "Mark Crispin" <MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU> a écrit dans le message de
>>> news:p ine.WNT.4.62.0411302030150.576@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU...
>>>
>>>> Berlin does not have HDTV.
>>>>
>>>
>>> So what ? This has nothing to do with the merits of the modulation used.
>>
>>
>>
>> Actually, it does.
>>
>> It's possible to choose a modulation scheme that does better at low
>> bitrate data in a given bandwidth if you know that high bitrate (i.e.,
>> HD)
>> is never going to happen.
>
>
> What does that mean? COFDM does better at 19.76 Mbps mobile than 8-VSB
> does at 19.34 Mbps fixed reception. (Congressional COFDM/8-VSB hearings
> 2000)
>
>>
>> COFDM happens to have this property: impulse noise problems increase
>> dramatically when the bitrate is increased and bandwidth is not also
>> increased to compensate, yet it works OK with SD.
>>
> Bitrate can be adjusted using COFDM to allow for a more robust reception
> in the presence of multipath. Lowering the bitrate has no affect on
> impulse noise. I think you have mixed up multipath with impulse noise.
>
> BTW when I turn on or off my desk lamp within two feet of my Samsung or
> LG 8-VSB receivers the picture hiccups. Every time! Could that be
> impulse noise?

Resistance does not mean immune. Any fool knows that.

> COFDM was able to deliver HD to a mobile receiver at a higher bit rate
> per HZ than 8-VSB uses in the US for fixed reception in an Australian test.
>
> And this was on the highways and byways of Sydney where you should
> expect a lot of impulse noise from all those vehicles.
>

How often do you hear impulse noise on AM radio? Cars are exremely RF
quiet internally because thera are so many computers in them now.

Matthew

--
Thermodynamics and/or Golf for dummies: There is a game
You can't win
You can't break even
You can't get out of the game
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 10:50:14 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Mark Crispin wrote:

> For most people in North America, analog TV works just fine. Cable and
> satellite did an excellent job of solving reception quality problems.
> The only people who have any need (or desire) to switch to digital TV
> are those people who want HDTV.

Most people differenciate between Over The Air (OTA) broadcasting and
satellite and cable.

Cable was initially a fix for the reception problems of OTA but it is a
seperate business now.

Bob Miller
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 11:39:18 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

On Fri, 3 Dec 2004, Stephen Neal wrote:
> Yep - it'll be interesting to see if by 2012 - current proposed UK analogue
> switch-off

But, but....

According to Psycho Bob Miller, DTV in the UK is such a resounding
success. Why then is the analog switch-off date so late as 2012? That's
years after the most pessimistic guess for analog switch-off in the
"failing" US.

Why not switch off analog next June? Psycho Bob says that all that is
needed to convert to digital is a $42 (presumably UKP 25) set top box and
rabbit ears.

Could it be that Psycho Bob isn't telling the full story?!?

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
December 3, 2004 2:55:58 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

On 2-Dec-2004, Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote:

> Most people differenciate between Over The Air (OTA) broadcasting and
> satellite and cable.
>
> Cable was initially a fix for the reception problems of OTA but it is a
> separate business now.

Since you seem to be in the nit-picking business may I suggest that you
"differentiate" between the correct spelling of the word and the way it
appears in your post. You might also learn the proper way to spell
"separate" so that your posts do not appear to be from a grade school
dropout.

I have no idea how old you are but I was around when both television
broadcasting and what is now called cable began.

Cable or CATV is an abbreviation for Community Access TeleVision which began
in areas that had no access to television. A television receiving antenna
was erected atop a hill or on a tower high enough to access distant
television signals and distributed them to people throughout the community.
It was a way for a small town or rural community to receive television
broadcast stations which they otherwise would not be able to access.

In those days CATV was seen as a way to overcome the natural limitations of
OTA television broadcasting which is largely limited to line-of-sight. I
never heard anyone in those days describe it as a '"fix for the reception
problems of OTA" as if there was something wrong with OTA.

However, as time went on CATV was seen as (and became) more than merely a
distribution system for OTA television programming. What transformed CATV
into today's cable television was the opportunities (not fixes) it offered
for additional programming which led to the wiring of larger towns and
cities with cable. In some areas it became a substitute for OTA until the
'must carry' rule took effect.

What all of this has to do with "Japan HDTV" is beyond me!
--
John in Sun Prairie
Anonymous
December 3, 2004 4:36:21 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:r9yrd.5870$u81.3868@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Stephen Neal wrote:
>> Bob Miller wrote:
>> [snip]
[snip]
>> Their sales pitch of 30+ rather than 5 channels (excluding the digital
>> radio services also carried), for a single, low, one-off cost, with 16:9
>> (and in some cases improved picture quality over analogue OTA) and
>> interactive TV services, does still seem to be a big driving force.
>> Whether HD versions of the original 5 networks would have had the same
>> driving force I don't know... (I'd have liked it...)
>
> The UK will have HD via satellite.

Yep - it'll be interesting to see if by 2012 - current proposed UK analogue
switch-off (though some regions might go earlier) - the UHF spectrum freed
up is sold for other purposes. The switchover plan involves moving DTV
stations into a smaller section of UHF Bands IV and V nationwide AIUI - so
creating a lump of free space in the current analogue/digital TV spectrum.
Conceivably this could be used for HDTV OTA - though satellite will have had
a headstart of 5+ years potentially.

Steve
Anonymous
December 3, 2004 8:23:34 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

A few small areas have gone digital in a trial that will see analog
turned off next March.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/south_west/405...

I think a lot of the 2012 talk has to do with politics. No one wants to
step on that snake. If the analog turnoff trials go well I think a brave
politician or two may suggest an earlier transition with some help for
the poor and elderly. If sales continue to increase like I expect they
will the turnoff could come in 2007 IMO.

Sales this holiday quarter may exceed a million and next year they say
another three million like this year. I say next year will see close to
five million. Come the spring of 2006 and major talk of an earlier
turnoff will be rampant. Especially since they will blow past Murdock's
Sky next fall.

Bob Miller

Mark Crispin wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Dec 2004, Stephen Neal wrote:
>
>> Yep - it'll be interesting to see if by 2012 - current proposed UK
>> analogue
>> switch-off
>
>
> But, but....
>
> According to Psycho Bob Miller, DTV in the UK is such a resounding
> success. Why then is the analog switch-off date so late as 2012?
> That's years after the most pessimistic guess for analog switch-off in
> the "failing" US.
>
> Why not switch off analog next June? Psycho Bob says that all that is
> needed to convert to digital is a $42 (presumably UKP 25) set top box
> and rabbit ears.
>
> Could it be that Psycho Bob isn't telling the full story?!?
>
> -- Mark --
Anonymous
December 3, 2004 4:55:47 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Mark Crispin" <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU> wrote in message
news:p ine.LNX.4.62.0412022033500.2296@shiva1.cac.washington.edu...
> On Fri, 3 Dec 2004, Stephen Neal wrote:
>> Yep - it'll be interesting to see if by 2012 - current proposed UK
>> analogue
>> switch-off
>
> But, but....
>
> According to Psycho Bob Miller, DTV in the UK is such a resounding
> success. Why then is the analog switch-off date so late as 2012?

The problem is partially political, partially technical - mainly political.

UK Digital TV - cable, satellite and terrestrial - has been really quite
popular. Freeview, the FTA non-pay-TV OTA system IS proving popular with
people who don't want to subscribe. However the analogue switch-off issue
is related to quite a few issues:

1. Secondary viewing and VCRs. Many houses that have "gone digital" have
only switched their primary (and in some cases secondary) receivers - but
not every bit of analogue reception kit (like a VCR or bedroom TV) There
are still few digital-TV ready VCRs (or set top boxes with two tuners
allowing a secondary independent VCR output)

2. Coverage. This is a political chicken and egg situation. Because DVB-T
in the UK is fitting in around the existing 4+1 analogue networks (4 have
VERY high coverage levels, the 5th network was only ever a partial coverage
network due to frequency overlaps with our European neighbours) the
transmissions are currently very low power compared to analogue. Even with
16QAM the coverage from OTA DVB-T is still nowhere near as good as
analogue - but it won't be able to be ramped up significantly until analogue
IS switched off. This conundrum means that some very careful change-over
planning is required - as the fallout involved with the entire nation losing
analogue TV on a single change-over day could be massive.

The current government plan (we'll probably have had two more general
elections by 2012 though) is for the digital TV change-over to be phased
regionally - allowing a LOT of manpower and publicity to be concentrated on
a smaller area to get the change-over message across. Last proposed start
date for the phased change-over was 2007

Germany has been able to do this far more quickly because far more people
use satellite and cable as their viewing sources - in the UK a huge number
of people use OTA as their primary source - usually with a roof-top aerial
(antenna), and it is almost universally the secondary viewing source (though
second cable and satellite receivers are growing in popularity, and I know
people with cable and satellite for primary viewing are buying Freeview
boxes for their bedrooms - The advert free, public service, CBBC/CBeebies in
a kids bedroom is a particular driving force etc.)

> That's years after the most pessimistic guess for analog switch-off in the
> "failing" US.

I think the massive popularity of OTA TV in the UK is significant. Cable TV
is a very minor player in the UK - with digital satellite (until very
recently) being seen as an exclusively pay-TV platform (where each secondary
receiver costs an additional £10-15 per month for subscription) The UK
DVB-T FTA system really only began being marketed about 2 years ago (prior
to this it was also seen as a Pay-TV platform until the Pay-TV operation
fell apart) - but I think the UK are taking a "worst-case" view.

(Incidentally I don't think this timescale includes the Channel Islands -
who are not fully linked with the UK - though they have their own BBC and
ITV operations. They currently have no DVB-T stuff due to frequency re-use
issues with France - they have analogue OTA and digital satellite)

>
> Why not switch off analog next June? Psycho Bob says that all that is
> needed to convert to digital is a $42 (presumably UKP 25) set top box and
> rabbit ears.

Whilst the DVB-T system works well where it works - the coverage levels are
nowhere near to matching analogue. We have over 1100 analogue TV
transmitter sites in the UK to provide the very high levels of coverage
(>99% of the UK population - might be 99.9% from memory) - even coming close
to replicating this with DVB-T is going to be difficult - and I believe
there is a requirement to meet this as closely as possible - so the
timescale probably reflects this?

>
> Could it be that Psycho Bob isn't telling the full story?!?
>

I think he is right to stress the popularity of Freeview in the UK- it IS
remarkably popular (Fastest selling consumer product in years - outpacing
DVD, the VCR etc. in uptake speed) - and the cost of receivers have made it
a very attractive proposition. The DVB implementation in the UK is a really
early version (we use 2k which isn't good for SFNs) - but the implementation
has been consistent nationwide (which follows our national network, rather
than local TV, infrastructure) and the facilities provided are really quite
an improvement over analogue (16:9, component digital pictures, digital text
services, digital radio services). However the most compelling reason to
move to Freeview are the extra services provided by teh national
broadcasters - which are high quality when compared to some of the pay-TV
stuff. (I can't stress how much, anecdotally, the presence of two BBC
childrens channels - with no adverts and really high quality output - has
driven Freeview in the UK!)

However the UK broadcast landscape is pretty different to the US and
Germany - so may not be comparable. Interesting differences for sure - but
I think we're past "We're better than you are" or "You're better than we
are" arguments these days - aren't we?

US drama is incredibly highly respected in the UK (The Sopranos, The West
Wing, ER, Six Feet Under etc.) - it may not rate through the roof but it has
a loyal following. As a broadcast industry we just don't have the budgets to
produce this kind of stuff. On the other hand we have a different kind of
TV schedule on some of our channels - with networks carrying more arts,
documentary, and our news bulletins on the main networks provide a much
greater amount of global news. (We also have mainstream networks who have a
public service remit, rather than a commercial imperative - and no
commercials to interrupt the programmes!)

Steve
Anonymous
December 3, 2004 4:55:48 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Stephen Neal (stephen.neal@nospam.as-directed.com) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> 1. Secondary viewing and VCRs. Many houses that have "gone digital" have
> only switched their primary (and in some cases secondary) receivers - but
> not every bit of analogue reception kit (like a VCR or bedroom TV) There
> are still few digital-TV ready VCRs (or set top boxes with two tuners
> allowing a secondary independent VCR output)

Then, too, if existing STBs don't have a system of multiple timers that
turn the STB on and off and change channels, it's pretty useless as a
front-end for a VCR.

--
Jeff Rife |
SPAM bait: | http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/OverTheHedge/CDChristmasLi...
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov |
spam@ftc.gov |
Anonymous
December 3, 2004 5:44:23 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:rAtrd.9768$NU3.4573@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
:<snipped>:
: BTW when I turn on or off my desk lamp within two feet of my Samsung
or
: LG 8-VSB receivers the picture hiccups. Every time! Could that be
: impulse noise?

Hmm, funny, my desk light (halogen with a transformer), that actually
sets right NEXT (base is actually sitting on top of my STB) to my LG
LST-3510 can go on and off and never make it flicker, not once, I just
tried it three times on each station that I receive OTA.
:

: Bob Miller
Russ
Anonymous
December 3, 2004 6:15:59 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

<snipped>
:
: I have no idea how old you are but I was around when both television
: broadcasting and what is now called cable began.



Yeah, Me to. I was in Jr. High when cable came to our small town in
West Texas. This was either 1965 or 1966. We were given "free cable
for life" because we allowed them to bury THE cable (from the tower)
down the ditch in front of our house. I wonder if the current owners
still get free cable, and if they do, if it is only the basic or the
"whole enchilada."



:
: Cable or CATV is an abbreviation for Community Access TeleVision
which began
: in areas that had no access to television. A television receiving
antenna
: was erected atop a hill or on a tower high enough to access distant
: television signals and distributed them to people throughout the
community.
: It was a way for a small town or rural community to receive
television
: broadcast stations which they otherwise would not be able to access.
: .

I remember that we (Dimmitt, Texas) were one of the very first CATV
systems in the nation. At that time OTA we could get 3 stations from
Amarillo. Cable added 3 more stations from Lubbock, so we had
basically 2 NBC, 2 CBS, and 2 ABC. No PBS or anything else. Cable
also added a "local weather channel" which consisted of a camera going
back and forth showing a thermometer, barometric pressure, wind speed
and direction and a 'white board' that had hand written public
announcements.

: In those days CATV was seen as a way to overcome the natural
limitations of
: OTA television broadcasting which is largely limited to
line-of-sight. I
: never heard anyone in those days describe it as a '"fix for the
reception
: problems of OTA" as if there was something wrong with OTA.



It did do just that. We were able to receive a "crystal clear"
picture, instead of the snowy picture that we had grown accustomed to.
But, that's all it did. Heck, it wasn't until the early to mid 70's
that TBS, WGN, KVTV (Ft. Worth's 'super station' of the era) were
added.
:
: However, as time went on CATV was seen as (and became) more than
merely a
: distribution system for OTA television programming. What transformed
CATV
: into today's cable television was the opportunities (not fixes) it
offered
: for additional programming which led to the wiring of larger towns
and
: cities with cable. In some areas it became a substitute for OTA
until the
: 'must carry' rule took effect.



HBO, The Weather Channel, CNN and ESPN came in pretty quick in the
late 70's and early 80's. Now were cookin', and the rest was (is)
history.



I moved to Ft. Worth from small town west Texas (1984), and got cable
and was disappointed. I began to keep a log of what I watched and
>90% was available OTA here. I ditched cable and went down and bought
me a new antenna. I'm still using it today, but to pull in my DTV
along with my analog signal. I now have 5 TV's, and 2 OTA STB's for
DTV. 3 still receive an OTA analog signal. I have cable, and I plan
to dump it now that I can get HDTV, which looks much better than
digital cable! I was comparing signals the other day, cable has many,
many more artifacts, snow, and even has ghosts. My DTV signal does
not! Cable, in my mind, has going to have to 'shape-up' and
'get-with-it' or they're gonna have'ta go! What will I miss, Poker
games, reruns of series that have long past gone away. Ah, who cares
anyway?



: What all of this has to do with "Japan HDTV" is beyond me!
: --
: John in Sun Prairie



Russ
!